House arrest claims for Najib: A test of government transparency and integrity

SHAH ALAM - The debate around a purported royal decree allowing former prime minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak to serve his remaining sentence under house arrest recently triggered widespread scrutiny and deepened public concerns.

The fate of Najib, currently serving a prison sentence, again captured public attention as focus shifted to the contentious addendum decree, reportedly issued by the Yang di-Pertuan Agong, ordering that Najib serve his remaining six-month sentence under house arrest.

Najib, through his lawyer Tan Sri Muhammad Shafee Abdullah, had first brought the decree to light by filing a judicial review regarding it in the Putrajaya High Court on April 1.

Despite key figures like Umno President Datuk Seri Ahmad Zahid Hamidi and Pahang Menteri Besar Datuk Seri Wan Rosdy Wan Ismail expressing support for Najib’s judicial review through affidavits, the Madani Government, led by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim, had yet to clarify the matter.

The issue resurfaced in Parliament when Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department Datuk Seri Azalina Othman Said refrained from addressing questions on the addendum, despite persistent inquiries from Opposition Chief Whip Datuk Seri Takiyuddin Hassan.

Azalina clarified that house arrest provisions were outside her remit and suggested that Home Minister Datuk Seri Saifuddin Nasution would be more suitable to answer.

She further clarified that she was not part of the Royal Pardons Board and, therefore, lacked knowledge of the addendum.

This response disappointed Najib's supporters, as Azalina had long been seen as one of Umno’s vocal leaders advocating for Najib’s release.

Commenting on Azalina's role in the Royal Pardons Board, constitutional law expert Associate Professor Dr Khairil Azmin Mokhtar suggested that Azalina might not be part of the Royal Pardons Board, as membership is governed by Article 42(5) of the Federal Constitution.

However, he argued that Cabinet discussions should have familiarised her with the decree.

"Unless Azalina is one of the three other members appointed by the King, she is fundamentally not involved in the Royal Pardons Board’s affairs.

"However, this does not give Azalina a free pass to claim ignorance about the addendum.

"I believe all decisions made by the Royal Pardons Board must still be discussed in Cabinet meetings.

"Azalina may have refrained from clarifying the addendum's status because the Cabinet decided that the Home Minister is responsible for managing the matter,” he added.

Expressing concern over transparency, Khairil cautioned that failure to address the matter openly could damage the integrity of royal institutions. “It is possible that the addendum remains unclear because the provisions under the House Detention Act have not yet been drafted, making it difficult for the government to fulfil the King’s decree if it were made public.

"Nonetheless, the government must be transparent about whether the addendum exists to prevent prolonged public misperceptions,” he said.

Meanwhile, Umno Supreme Council member Datuk Seri Mohd Shafie Abdullah warned that allowing the controversy to persist could erode grassroots confidence in the party.

He described that Umno’s grassroots continued to believe the addendum exists, based on the affidavits filed by Zahid and Wan Rosdy in support of Najib’s claim.

“As long as no party denies it, the addendum issue will persist.

"Some officials may claim it is a rumour, but why has the government never issued a formal denial?

"The government must take responsibility by confirming whether the addendum truly exists. If left unresolved, this issue will affect grassroots support and confidence in the current government,” he said.

Former Selangor Menteri Besar Dr Mohamad Khir Toyo echoed this sentiment, calling for transparency and urging Umno ministers in the Unity Government to act consistently.

“The addendum decree is a royal supplementary decree. Thus, the Madani Government and Umno leaders serving as ministers cannot act with double standards in implementing royal decrees.

"It is unacceptable to fully adhere to the King’s decree in forming the Unity Government while seemingly hiding the addendum when it potentially impacts the government negatively.

"Most importantly, just clarify whether or not the addendum exists. The public is growing tired of the government’s evasive stance, especially on important royal matters,” he said.

Adding to the government’s stance, Saifuddin later clarified in Parliament that the supposed royal addendum allowing house arrest for Najib was mere hearsay.